The nature restoration bill came to a vote in the European Parliament in Strasbourg on Wednesday, where it passed by a narrow majority after weeks of heated debate, with some saying it was a victim of election campaigning, the European Media Platform reported. Newsroom, in a detailed article published on Friday, quotes Agerpres.

In June 2022, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen proposed the Nature Restoration Act, part of the Green Deal. The proposal to restore at least 20% of Europe’s degraded ecosystems by 2030 is considered a central pillar of the EU’s biodiversity strategy.

The law, previously rejected by parliamentary committees, aims to restore degraded ecosystems by consolidating forest areas and marine habitats and improving connectivity between rivers. It is part of a long-term strategy to restore degraded nature across the EU, given that more than 80% of European habitats are degraded. It also aims to make the EU more resilient to global warming, but has proved divisive.

Opposition came mainly from the European People’s Party (EPP), von der Leyen’s parliamentary group.

On Wednesday, the controversial proposal passed a vote in the European Parliament with 336 votes in favour, 300 against and 13 abstentions.

“European Trumpism” or sincere concern for food security?

The Nature Restoration Act sparked heated debate before the vote. If rejected, the EU’s climate neutrality goals could be jeopardized.

The bill became an important topic of the election campaign in the perspective of the elections to the European Parliament in June 2024. MEPs from the left and the center accuse the EPP of using the bill as a political pawn.

“What we are seeing now … I would call ‘European Trumpism,'” said French MEP Pascal Canfin, a member of the liberal group Renew and chairman of the parliamentary environment committee, referring to the management style of former US President Donald Trump and his policies to reduce environmental protection.

Before the vote, Dutch MEP Mohammed Hahim of the center-left Socialists and Democrats (S&D) party said that “it seems that the elections have started and it’s all to the detriment of nature.”

The largest political group in the parliament, the conservative European People’s Party, whose main voters are European farmers, tried to reject the text, arguing that it would reduce the EU’s food security, affect farmers and fishermen and limit the possibility of building wind and hydropower. .

Rejecting the bill, German EPP leader Manfred Weber strengthened the axis with right-wing parties. Ahead of the vote, one of the leading EPP MEPs on the issue, German Peter Liese, said the Commission’s bill was “such a bad proposal” that rejecting it was “the only alternative”. The German MEP noted that the EPP supports “many, many more” Green Deal laws, but “we are already on the verge of doing too much.”

In addition, the law divided Croatian MEPs on the left and the right, who had opposing interpretations of the law’s impact on the country’s fishermen. Tomislav Sokol (EPP) noted that if fishing and trawling are limited by excessively strict measures, it will no longer be possible to buy fish locally, but from imports. Fred Matic (S&D), on the other hand, emphasized that this regulation will prevent foreign fish from being served in Croatia.

MEPs from the Socialist, Green and Left factions supported the law, and many joined Swedish climate activist Greta Thunberg in a protest on Tuesday. “Our message to politicians is to put nature and people before profit and greed,” Thunberg said at a demonstration in Strasbourg.

At the same time, farmers responded with their tractors to the call of the European farmers’ association Copa-Cogeca and protested against the nature protection law in front of the EP building.

Greta Thunberg and other climate activists protest outside the headquarters of the European Parliament in Strasbourg (Photo: FREDERICK FLORIN / AFP / Profimedia)

A split in the majority of Ursula, an unprecedented unity among others

The adoption of the text confirmed the split of the von der Leyen majority.

“Obstruction from the right, the far right and some liberals led to the adoption of a largely watered-down version,” said Belgian MEP Caroline Roose (Greens). Seas Under Threat, a marine environmental NGO, agreed, criticizing what it called the “populist stance” of right-wing and far-right MPs and the “much watered-down” final position.

Although there were critics, the unprecedented unity between the S&D, the left, the Greens and part of the Renewal Party in the corridors of Strasbourg was impressive. It is premature to talk about an alternative majority to the one Weber has in mind. But the earthquake came with the collapse of the EPP-S&D axis, which supported Commission President Ursula von der Leyen. She has yet to comment on the vote, but it is highly likely that she will express her moral conviction on the Green Deal, a priority of her mandate. The vote is a “political result for the Commission”, said Paolo Gentiloni, the Commissioner for Economic Affairs.

French MEP Manon Aubry, co-president of the Left, said the vote marked the defeat of an attempt to bring the centre-right alliance, backed by Giorgia Meloni’s Italian government, into the EU.

“We were relieved,” Aubrey said. “This is a big defeat for the coalition between the People’s Party and the right, the coalition you know well in Italy with the Meloni government. They tried in Italy, and now they wanted to try in the European Parliament, but we defeated them. This is proof that together left parties can save the environmental agenda and defeat the right.”

At the height of the campaign for Spain’s general election on July 23, the vote pitted the two main Spanish political parties in the European Parliament: the Socialist Party, which voted in favor, and the Popular Party, which voted against.

Although the text was passed by a narrow margin, the leader of the Social Democrats in the European Parliament, Spain’s Iraçe García, accused the Spanish People’s Party of “joining those who deny climate change” by aligning themselves with conservative and far-right groups. .

Now the law on the restoration of nature is awaiting a trialogue test

After Wednesday’s vote, the European Parliament will begin negotiations with the Council of the European Union on the final form of the law.

The council, which is a co-legislator, adopted its negotiating position last week. According to it, member states must restore at least 30% of the total area of ​​habitats in terrestrial, coastal, freshwater and marine ecosystems that are in poor condition. This differs from the Commission’s original proposal, which was that it should apply to 30% of the total area for each of the seven habitat types.

In June, the EU Environment Council adopted general approaches to the draft law on nature restoration. The environment ministers of the member states reached a common position on the proposal not by consensus but by vote.

Despite numerous reservations expressed at the national level, the Swedish presidency managed to impose a proposal that was accepted by a qualified majority. Compared to the initial proposal of the European Commission, the draft offers a long list of flexibilities.

Of the 27 member states, 20 voted in favor, Finland, Italy, the Netherlands, Poland and Sweden were against, and Austria and Belgium abstained.

Read also: What is the mood of Europeans a year before the European elections?